***** POSTSCRIPT *****
Concerning the Dangers to Our Civilization.

Geology is strongly linked to biology, particularly evolution of species. Many aspects of biological evolution remain to be elucidated, but we can make some poignant observations regarding our own species. Although our very origin is still clouded, it is possible to analyze and prognosticate the existing situation
.
By the means of technology we already dominate many species, but we did not relent the inherited traits, especially competitiveness within our own species. This leads to a lot of strife, which in turn causes waste of resources and retardation in potential progress. The adopted legal system that discourages interpersonal strife, except in formal warfare, induces many individuals to resort to political machinations. History is full of examples.

We attempt to structure behavioral restraints within a civilization, but various individuals find loopholes, and cause the system to collapse. This can only be explained by realizing that a segment of our species is still dominated by inherited biological traits which they cannot rationally control.

For example, members of various religions have retarded the development of science and technology. Similarly, individuals within academic organizations habitually interfere with the disclosure of competitive ideas. For example, the fact that Newton was discouraged from pursuing physics and mathematics, has cost an inestimable loss to the society. Yet, the same is going on to this day. In geology, the ideas regarding continental drift, expounded by Alfred L. Wegener (1880-1930), have been ignored during his lifetime. Only subsequently have members of academia found it convenient to adopt the concept, and elaborate on it to promote continental plate tectonics.

Similarly, I attempted to publish my geological theory already in 1966, but no journal would accept the paper. Clearly, the editors and reviewers have the right to reject nonsense, but they never provided a review. Thus, it is clear that politics was the only motive.

The Internet has curtailed some of the publishing censorship, but even here attempts are made to discourage the disclosure process.

The following correspondence, exchanged via e-mails, should give the reader an insight into the existing attitude of organized geology. It is not a castigation of the member involved, it is intended to help to bring some improvement in the existing situation, and thus, enabling scientific progress.

It is a laudable policy of
ibiblio not to curtail publication of information with sensible content, but the correctness and relevance of the content is author’s responsibility. This policy is stated, yet, the individual identified below, did not contact me, but instead attempted to influence the open policy at ibiblio. Although he states that this was his personal reaction to my publication, the content has the flavor of a professional creation by a public relations outfit. If that is not the case, then he has a talent in that area.

LETTER TO IBIBLIO: 11/13/03

To whom it may concern:

Please forward this note on to whomever might be the closest thing, if such exists, to an editor or librarian at ibiblio.org.

I am writing to express my puzzlement in discovering today that ibiblio.org, which I previously thought of as a very useful resource for information, is potentially (I fear) a repository for what might best be described as "crackpots" posing as authorities in their adopted fields.

The link that I saw today, under "What's New", prompted me to comment (see: bttp://www.ibiblio.org/meno/ ). I am a geologist, and having spent so much time studying such a breadth of material, I was somewhat alarmed to find what is being purported to be a work in geological science presented without some disclaimer.

Now, please do not be mistaken I think that ibiblio.org should be commended as the open and public library and archive that it is. However, in a library, one might be directed to such peerreviewed publications as "Nature" and "Science". Or to texts that have some semblance of credibility in their fields, often chosen by librarians. And what of ibiblio.org? How was such a nonsensical rant posing as geology or science published in such a prominent place with no disclaimer whatsoever? Is misinformation to be expected from any library of the future; is that the cost of the digital age? Is "publish" merely the function of a "publish button", with no longer any responsibility for the accuracy of content?

In bttp://wvvw.ibiblio.org/meno/ Frank M. Meno, Ph.D., misinterprets geological diagrams borrowed from other publications, and does not document any findings. Lacking any alternative offering, Meno's "new theory" stands as the sole geological offering in the "public's library".

NEXT >>>

<<< BACK